In consideration of changing my Procurement structural team modeling from a category structure that is well established, however individualized whereby one person is responsible for a category as a CTL (category team lead) and has a team supporting as CTMs (category team members).  I am contemplating changing the structure to have split functions, strategic and operational.   Both models, the current CT setup and the strategic/operational model have pros and cons, clearly.  I am looking for reference points from others who have been through this change, are going through this change, or contemplated it and decided on another option, and what was that option?

I’ve seen this attempted on the sales contract side of things (not procurement) but I think the same challenges apply.

Fundamentally trying to define “strategic” vs “operational” (or in the way I’ve seen it done, trying to define different levels of difficulty (“easy” work going to team 1, “difficult” to team 2) can have mixed results because the categorization itself is so tricky. Is an ABC type agreement always easy (or always operational)? Is an XYZ always difficult (or always strategic)? Also the “easy” or “operational” team can feel bored or unchallenged if anytime there’s a complex challenge, it gets reassigned to the other team.

It all depends on the strategic objectives you have. If category knowledge is crucial your current model could be the best, it may also be more agile than a model with potentially more handovers. If you would like to offshore work, a split may be better. If you are looking for increases customer satisfaction, a more customer facing model could be the better solution. Labeling work as strategic and operational could make feel people on the operational side as '2nd hand citizens.'  In my personal experience fostering a collaborative model where all contributors are recognized equally works best.